3  .3o.  ^^ 


3Frnm  tly?  Sltbraru  of 

tlt^  ffilthrarg  of 
Prtttr^ton  Stj^nlngtral  S^mtnarg 

BT     OOP      ,R^;ai2L    l^nT"^ 

Foster,  R.  v.  1845-1914 
Our  doctrines 


/I^CpI!) 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


A   BRIEF   STATEMENT   OF   THE    POSITION    OF    THE     CUMBER- 
LAND   PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH   ON   THE   PRINCIPAI^ 
DOCTRINES     OF    THE     CHRISTIAN     FAITH. 


By  R.  V.  FOSTER, 

Professor  in  the  Theological  Semiuary,  Cumberlaad  University, 
^  Lebanon,  Tenn. 


NASHVILLE,  TENN. : 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Publishing  Housk. 


OTHER   BOOKS  BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 


Old  Testament  Studies— An  Outline  of  Old  Testament  Theology ....  $1  25 

Co  mmentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 1  50 

Brief  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Theology 75 

Call  to  the  Ministry 05 

The  Twenty-Seven  Books 05 


OUR    DOCTRINES. 


Introductory  Word. 
The  General  Assembly  requested  "The  Cumberland 
Presbyterian"  to  publish  a  series  of  articles  setting  forth 
our  doctrines,  with  comparative  allusions  here  and 
there  to  the  corresponding  doctrines  of  other  Christian 
denominations.  This  brief  statement  is  the  only  apology 
that  need  be  made  for  this  and  the  few  other  articles 
which  shall  follow  on  the  same  general  subject.  It  is 
obviously  an  easier  matter  for  any  writer  or  speaker  to 
tell  what  he  himself  believes,  or  what  his  church  be- 
heves,  than  it  is  to  make  known  what  other  people  be- 
lieve. Being  aware  of  this,  I  shall  be  as  careful  as  pos- 
sible to  represent  the  beliefs  of  my  ecclesiastical  neigh- 
bors justly,  in  so  far  as  I  may  represent  them  at  all,  and 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


in  quoting  whatever  I  may  have  to  say  about  them  I 
shall  use  only  the  official  creeds  or  the  writings  of  their 
authorized  teachers.    AVe  should  be  generous  enough  to 
suppose  that  the  Methodist  Church,  for  example,  would 
not  be  wilhnp^  to  have  itself  valued  in  the  coin  of  any 
Methodist  writer  who  might  happen  to  come  along;  for 
every  body  knows,  perhaps,  that  the  country  is  rich  not 
only  in  political  cartoonists,  but  also  in  theological  and 
ecclesiastical  ones.    It  ought  not  to  be  so,  but  it  is.    The 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  has  always  been  a 
good  illustration  of  the  generosity  of  which  I  speak. 
It  is  not  famous  as  a  controversalist  in  its  relations  with 
other  churches;   and  in  its   methods   of   increasing  its 
membership,  it  has  always  been  very  fair-minded  and 
clean.     This  fact  has  never  been  formulated  and  put 
into  its  creed  as  an  article  of  faith,  so  to  speak,  but  I  do 
think,  nevertheless,   that   it  ought   to  be   regarded  as 
something  very  much  in  its  favor.    Apart  from  its  chil- 
dren, who  may,  in  a  sense,  be  said  to  be  in  it  by  birth, 
the  great  majority  of  its  members,  during  the  fourscore 
years  or  more  of  its  history,  have  been  brought  into  it 
from  the  world.     It  lias  most  probably,  in  the  aggre- 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


gate,  given  many  more  of  its  converts  to  other  denom- 
inations than  it  has  retained  for  its  own  edification.  It 
has,  to  its  disadvantage  numerically,  always  tried  hard  to 
save  sinners,  even  when  it  knew  that  those  sinners,  if 
saved,  would  not  become  its  members.  Having  given 
the  reader  this  little  glimpse  of  what  may  be  called  our 
"genius,"  I  hasten  to  the  doctrines. 

Is  it  not  strange  that  intelligent  people  should  make 
such  a  broad  and  radical  distinction,  as  some  do,  between 
"doctrine"  and  "life?"  How  can  the  disposition,  which 
every  now  and  then  gains  considerable  currency  to  ut- 
terly depreciate  doctrinal  statements  on  the  part  of  the 
churches,  be  regarded  otherwise  than  as  due  to  thought- 
lessness?—to  say  the  least  of  it.  Is  it  really  true  that  it 
makes  no  difference  what  a  church,  or  an  individual 
man,  believes?  We  might  as  well  say  that  a  tree  can 
grow  without  having  any  soil  out  of  which  to  grow.  It 
doubtless  is  true  that  character  lies,  to  a  great  extent, 
at  least,  in  the  state  of  the  will,  rather  than  in  the  state 
of  the  intelhgerice,  but  it  is  also  true  that  the  state  of 
the  latter  has  much  to  do  in  determining  the  state  of 
the  former.    The  fact  is  if  a  man  does  not  live  accord- 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


ing  to  his  beliefs,  he  is  not  living  according  to  his  prin- 
ciples— whether  good  or  bad — and  hence  he  is  so  far 
a  false  man. 

Whether  presented  in  the  creeds  of  the  churches,  or 
in  the  theological  systems  of  their  authorized  teachers, 
the  doctrines  fall  under  one  or  the  other  of  the  follow- 
ing heads:  God,  and  his  relation  to  the  world;  man, 
including  sin;  Christ  and  his  work,  including  the  offices 
of  the  Ploly  Spirit;  the  various  doctrines  of  grace;  the 
church;  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  and  other  "last 
things."    In  the  main  we  shall  follow  this  order. 


I. 

God. 

All  Christian  denoniinations  acrree  that  God  is  in  the 
highest  sense  a  Person — that  he  is  a  Spirit  infinite,  eter- 
nal, and  unchangeable,  in  his  being,  wisdom,  power, 
holiness,  justice,  goodness,  and  trntli.  But  they  are 
understood  to  dill'er  somew^hat  among  themselves'  in 
respect  to  the  practical  emphasis  which  they  place  on 
one  or  another  of  these  attributes  as  compared  with 
others.  Some,  for  example,  are  understood  to  attach  a 
larger  stress  of  importance  to  his  sovereignty  and  justice 
than  to  his  love,  for  instance,  wliile  others  place  the 
greater  stress  on  his  benevolence,  and  others,  still,  seek 
to  emphasize  each  one  as  of  equal  importance  with  every 
ctlior.  Cumberland  Presbyterians,  as  against  their  more 
Caivinistic  brethren,  have  never  been  able  to  see,  for  in- 
srance,.  how  Cod  could  show  forth  his  justice  in  the 
damnation  of  one  man  and  the  salvation  of  another, 
both  of  them  being  regarded  by  him  as  equally  meriting 
the  former,  that  is  to  say,  without  any  foresight  on  his 
part  of  faith  in  Christ  on  their  part.  If  he  had  no  f ore- 
sia-ht  or  knowledge  of  the  cases  witli  which  he  was  deal- 
ing, how  could  he  know  that  it  was  just  to  do  this  or 
merciful  to  do  that?  True,  everything  that  he  does  is 
just,  absolutely;  but  may  we  not  say  also  that  every- 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


tiling  he  does  is  merciful  absolutely?  It  seems  to  Cum- 
berland Presbyterians  that  God  must  show  forth  his  jus- 
tice and  mercy,  not  one  in  one  man  and  the  other  in  an- 
other man,  but  both  in  the  same  man;  and  they  think 
that  he  does  this  gloriously  in  the  salvation  offered  in 
the  atonin.2^  death  of  Christ.  This  was  a  manifestation 
of  both  justice  and  mercy  in  the  highest  sense;  and 
therefore  the  question  whether  this  or  that  man  shall 
show  foi-th  his  justice  or  mercy,  we  make  to  depend  on 
the  relation  of  the  man  to  Christ. 

But  Cumberland  Presbyterians,  as  well  as  Presbyte- 
rians and  Lutherans,  teach  very  strenuously  that  salva- 
tion is  by  grace,  while  the  Eoman  Catholics  and  some 
others  deny,  and  say  that  at  least  in  part  it  is  a  matter 
of  good  works.  By  salvation  we  mean  here,  not  that 
life-long  process  which  the  Christian  "works  out  with 
fear  and  trembling,*'  but  the  initial  fact  of  the  Chris- 
tian life  which  consists  in  having  our  hearts  renewed, 
and  our  sins  forgiven  by  the  grace  of  God  for  the  sake 
of  Christ,  and  ourselves  received  back  into  the  divine 
favor.  It  is  exceedingly  dangerous,  we  think,  in  so  im- 
portant a  matter  as  this,  to  encourage  the  sinner  to  de- 
pend upon  anything  he  can  do  himself,  or  upon  any- 
thing that  he  has,  such  as  faith,  good  resolutions,  refor- 
mation, water  baptism,  etc.  Cumberland  Presbyterians 
think  that  "Nothing  in  my  hand  I  bring,  simply  to  thy 
cross  I  cling,''  should  be  the  motto  of  every  sinner  who 
would  entertain  a  rational  hope  of  heaven.  On  this 
Rock  we  take  our  stand,  and  regard  all  else  as  sinking 
sand. 


OUR  DOCTRINES. 


There  is  another  way  in  which  we  can  Adew  God.  We 
may  call  it  the  old  ever  interesting  question  concerning 
the  relation  between  his  knowledge  and  his  will.  It 
means  this:  Yon  know  some  things  as  intuitions— that 
is,  you  cannot  be  a  rational  being  and  not  know  them  so 
soon  as  you  think  of  them.  You  know  other  things  be- 
cause you  have  learned  them  in  some  way.  You  know 
still  other  things  because  of  an  act  of  your  will  which 
you  have  put  forth;  as,  for  instance,  you  know  that  you 
are  going  to  town  to-day  because  you  have  determined 
to  go;  or,  that  your  child  or  servant  will  do  thus  and  so, 
because  you  have  determined  that  they  shall.  The  de- 
cree, or  determination  of  your  will,  as  you  see,  precedes 
this  knowledge.  Xow  the  question  is:  "Is  God's  knowl- 
edge that  a  certain  man  shall  be  saved,  for  instance, 
based  on  the  decree  that  he  shall  be  saved?  If  so,  it 
would  seem  that  his  knowledge  that  another  man  will  be 
lost  must  depend  on  God's  decree  that  he  shall  be  lost. 
But  how  do  the  churches  answer  the  question?  The 
rigid  Calvinists  say,  yes.  The  Arminians  say,  no.  I 
honestly  believe  that  Cumberland  Presbyterians  say  yes 
and  no  both;  for  as  everybody  knows  who  has  even  a  lit- 
tle experience  with  the  ambiguity  of  words,  a  dogmatic 
affirmative  does  not  always  exclude  a  dogmatic  negative 
to  the  same  general  question.  Is  man  an  animal?  Yes. 
Is  man  an  animal?  No.  In  the  one  case  I  refer  to  his 
body,  in  the  other  to  his  soul.  Our  Confession  of  Faith 
says  that  God  "freely  and  unchangeably  ordained  or  de- 
termined what  he  himself  would  do,"  etc.  I  do  not 
suppose  anybody  doubts  that.     By  his  grace  he  saved 


lo  OUR  DOCTRINES. 


John  Bimjan  (or  any  other  person);  therefore  he  deter- 
mined or  decreed  to  do  it.  This  is  all  plain.  But  the 
question  is,  which  came  first,  his  foreknowledge  of  John 
Bunyan's  salvation,  or  his  decree  in  regard  to  John  Bun- 
yan's  salvation?  We  say  both  come  first,  and  both  come 
second.  Does  the  decree  come  first?  Yes  and  no. 
Does  the  foreknowledge  come  first?  Yes  and  no.  We 
explain  thus:  If  we  may  reverently  predicate  past  and 
future  of  God,  we  may  say  that  he  looks  forward  and 
sees  one  of  his  determinations  of  will,  or  decretal  acts, 
as  an  accomplished  fact;  but  we  affirm  that  he  would 
not  foresee  it  as  an  accomplished  fact  without  at  the 
same  time  seeing  that  its  accomplishment  is  due  to  liis 
determination  that  it  should  be  so.  This  sort  of  fore- 
knowledge necessarily  comes  after  the  decree,  and  to  this 
extent  we  say  'Ves'-  with  our  more  Calvinistic  brethren. 
But  in  the  broader  sense  of  the  term  foreknowledge — 
Calvin^s  definition  of  Omniscience,  for  instance — God 
must  have  logically  foreknown  all  his  accomplished  de- 
crees as  possibilities,  before  he  foreknew  them  as  accom- 
plished; for  if  he  had  not  foreknown  them  as  possibili- 
ties he  never  would  have  decreed  to  accomplish  them. 
In  this  general  sense  we  say  that  foreknowledge  is  log- 
ically antecedent  to  the  decree;  and  in  this  sense  we 
adoi^t  the  "No"  of  our  Arminian  brethren.  So  in  our 
humble  opinion  it  seems  that  an  ambiguity  has  lurked 
in  the  word  foreknowledge — like  the  whelp  of  the  wolf 
which  musicians  tell  us  no  man  can  ever  chase  from  the 
piano  strings. 

But  another  question — and  fortunately  we  have  vir- 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  n 

tualh'  already  answered  it  at  least  in  our  wa}' — is  tliis: 
Is  the  decree  conditional  or  unconditional?  The  severer 
Calvinist  says  ^'unconditional/'"  and  he  means  one  tiling; 
the  Arminian  savs  "conditional/*  and  he  means  another 
thing.  How  is  it?  AYill  anyljody  deny  that  the  decree 
is  conditional  (1)  on  the  antecedently  seen  possibility  of 
the  event  which  it  is  proposed  to  decree,  and  (2)  on  the 
\dsdom  and  righteousness  of  Clod  himself?  But  as  the 
possibility  or  impossibility  of  the  divinely  contemplated 
event  lies  in  God  and  not  in  the  event  itself,  and  as  the 
wisdom  and  righteousness  involved  are  also  of  the  na- 
ture of  God,  it  is  unnecessary  to  say  that  the  decree  is 
not  conditioned  by  anything  outside  of  God  himself. 
So  far  as  the  accomplished  event  is  concerned,  all  the 
conditions  which  may  be  affirmed  of  it  are  already  in- 
cluded in  the  decree  to  accomplish  it,  just  as  the  decree 
previous  to  its  issuance  was  included  in  the  na- 
ture of  God.  Looking  at  the  matter  then 
apart  from  anything  outside  of  God,  we  may  truly 
say.  with  the  Calvinist,  that  the  decree  is  unconditional. 
But  if  anyone  should  choose  to  conceive  of  these  ele- 
ments of  God's  nature  as  being  projected  forward  into 
man,  and  as  finding  an  objective  existence  in  him.  then 
he  mav  sav  if  he  wishes  to  that  the  decree  is  conditioned 
on  these  elements  viewed  as  being  outside  of  God. 
That  is  the  reason,  then,  as  I  see  it,  why  a  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  may  consistently  say  with  the  Calvinist 
that  the  decree  is  unconditional,  and  at  the  same  time 
say  with  the  Arminian  that  it  is  conditional.  In  the 
one  case  he  speaks  theologically,  and  in  the  other  he 


12  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

speaks  anthropologically,  though  I  do  not  mean  that 
evervbody  who  so  speaks  knows  even  what  these  words 
signify.  But  the  Calvinist  uniformly  speaks  in  the 
former  way,  and  the  Arminians  uniformly  in  the  latter. 
I  may  add  that  I  have  chosen  to  look  at  this  ancient 
question  from  this  point  of  view,  because  our  ^vriters 
have  been  in  the  habit  of  considering  it  almost  exclu- 
sively on  what  I  may  call  its  ethical  side.  We  all  know 
that  according  to  the  standard  of  righteousness  which 
God  has  given  us,  it  does  not  look  fair  that  God  should 
unconditionally  select  out  of  the  human  race,  all  of 
whose  members  are  equally  guilty,  some  men  to  be  the 
objects  of  his  mercy  and  love  and  others  to  be  the  ob- 
jects of  liis  wrath;  and  men  can  never  be  convinced  that 
it  is  fair.  But  this  has  been  said  a  great  many  times, 
and  there  was  no  reason,  so  far  as  I  could  see,  why  I 
should  say  it  over  a^ain. 

The  subject  will  have  to  be  referred  to  again  when  we 
speak,  in  its  proper  place,  of  our  view  of  predestina- 
tion— the  word  which  occurs  in  Eom.  viii.  29. 


It  would  not  be  right  for  me  to  pass  to  my  next 
topic  before  advertising  the  attitude  of  the  Cumber- 
land Presbyterian  Church  in  respect  to  another  matter 
concerning  which  the  faith  of  some  in  these  days,  as 
in  all  days,  waxes  weak.  I  refer  to  the  subject  of  the 
Holy  Trinity.  It  is  a  mystery;  and  we  believe  it  but 
not  because  we  understand  it.  Three  eternal  Per- 
sons, numerically  one  eternal  essence  or  substance; 
the  persons  equal  in  all  their  attributes,  but  not  in  their 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  13 

respective  relations  and  offices;  and  their  names  are 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  Here  we  are  at  one 
with  all  evangelical  denominations;  and  we  cannot 
change  our  position  without  at  the  same  time  breaking 
into  pieces  the  whole  plan  of  redemption.  This  is  one 
chief  circumstance  that  makes  us  willing  to  accept  an 
incomprehensible  mystery — like  a  great  many  others 
which  we  accept  without  questioning,  every  day.  But 
we  know  the  inadequacy  of  the  word  Person;  and  we 
know  that  no  language,  living  or  dead,  can  furnish  a 
better  one.  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  perhaps 
even  more  explicable  than  that  of  the  divine  unity,  in 
the  sense  in  which  the  Unitarians  use  the  word  unity. 
The  Unitarians  and  UniversaliSts  have  never  been 
known  to  any  extent  in  our  part  of  the  country;  and  I 
mean  nothing  bad  when  I  say  that  I  cannot  escape  the 
belief  that  it  would  be  a  misfortune  if  they  should  ever 
gain  an  extensive  place  among  us. 


II. 

God's  Relation  to  the  World. 

On  this  subject  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Clmreh 
stands  side  by  side  with  the  most  evanoelical.  Its 
teaching-  as  set  forth  in  the  Confession  of  Faith,  its 
pulpits,  and  its  literature,  are  in  harmony  with  the 
Scriptures,  and  are  expressed  to  a  great  extent  in  quo- 
tions,  word  for  word,  from  the  holy  Book.  This  any 
one  may  see  for  himself  Ly  consulting  Dr.  Beard's 
commentary  on  the  doctrine  as  contained  in  his  work 
on  theology.  The  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church 
believes  that  God  created  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
out  of  material  which  did  not  exist  until  he  called  it 
into  being.  It  owes  its  continuous  existence  to  his  up- 
holding power.  He  also  governs  it,  causing  it  to  work 
out  his  wise  and  holy  purposes.  He  is  not  the  author 
of  sin;  he  created  man,  but  he  did  not  cause  him  to 
sin.  His  providential  care  extends  over  all  his  creat- 
ures, and  especially  over  man,  and  more  especially  still 
over  those  who  love  and  serve  him.  While  this  church 
believes  that  God  is  infinite  in  wisdom,  power,  and 
love,  it  believes  that  it  is  nevertheless  eminently  worth 
while  for  Christians  to  pray.  It  believes  that  prayer 
is  a  means  of  grace,  and  also  a  condition  upon  which 
God  chooses  to  give  many  other  things.     But  it  is  far 


OVR  DOCTRINES.  15 

removed  from  any  form  or  degree  of  "spiritualism," 
and  from  "faith-healing"  technically  so-called,  and 
from  the  worse  than  foolish  babblings  of  those  wlio 
have  stolen  a  good  name  wherewith  to  label  a  bad  thing, 
to  wit,  "Christian  Science." 

It  follows,  of  conrse,  that  the  Cumberland  Presby- 
terian C.hurch  does  not  agree  with  the  deists  who  still 
affirm  privately  and  in  public,  that  the  world  is  of  the 
natnre  of  a  machine,  like  a  clock  for  instance;  and  that 
its  maker,  having  made  it  and  wound  it  up,  has  noth- 
ing more  to  do  with  it. 

A  church  that  can  keep  its  head  level  in  these  days 
or  innumerable  isms,  and  social,  political,  theological, 
and  scientific  eccentricities  without  number,  is  worthy 
of  public  confidence.  The  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  believes  that  God  is  in  his  world,  and  that  his 
hand  works  wide  "through  the  universal  frame."  It 
speaks,  in  the  main,  with  one  voice.  It  does  not  take 
up  with  "every  wind  of  doctrine"  concerning  provi- 
dence or  any  thing  else,  and  cry  to-day,  "Lo  here,"  and 
to-morrow,  "'Lo  there." 


III. 

Man. 

As  for  man  he  is  the  beiiio-  to  be  saved.  As  orig- 
inally created  he  was  endowed  with  a  free  will,  and  all 
his  affections  and  inclinations  were  toward  God. 
Some,  but  not  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
teach  that  morally  he  was  in  a  sort  of  equilibrium,  a 
state  midway  between  good  and  evil,  or  holiness  and 
sinfulness;  and  that  all  he  had  to  do  in  order  to  become 
either  was  to  exercise  his  free  will  and  move  in  that 
direction.  But  we  believe  that  man  had  a  moral  char- 
acter before  the  fall,  and  that  this  moral  character 
consisted  in  a  positive  and  decided  proclivity  of  his 
will  and  affections  toward  God.  His  "fall"  consisted 
in  the  voluntary  movement  of  his  will  and  affections 
in  the  opposite  direction.  We  believe  also  that  when 
he  had  moved  himself  thither  he  could  not  move  him- 
self back  to  his  former  position.  He  retained  his  will, 
in  some  sense  to  be  sure,  just  as  a  man  retains  his  will 
after  he  has  fallen  down  a  precipice.  Apart  from 
strength  from  a  source  other  than  liimself,  he  cannot 
rise  again.  But  the  will  is  not  a  material  body,  and 
hence  we  must  say  even  more  than  this.  While  the 
will  after  its  fall  is  a  complete  will,  as  complete  as  it 
was  before,  its  moral  character  is  seriously  damaged; 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  17 

in  fact,  it  has  elements  in  it  ever  thereafter  which  were 
utterly  foreign  to  it  before.  Just  as  soon  after  its 
birth  as  the  nature  of  the  case  admits,  does  this  new 
element  of  the  will  crop  out  and  become  visible  in 
every  child  that  has  been  born  from  that  evil  day  to 
this.  To  speak  in  plain  language,  it  is  an  element  of 
rebellion  against  God.  In  the  early  spring  if  one  who 
knows  not  its  nature  should  examine  with  the  utmost 
care  the  tender  plant  he  could  find  no  thistles;  but  they 
are,  as  everybody  knows,  in  the  nature  of  the  plant, 
and  as  the  days  go  by,  they  in  due  time  inevitably  ap- 
pear. It  is  sad  to  think  so,  of  course,  but  no  child 
born  of  man  and  of  woman  is  ever  ^'by  nature"  what 
the  first  man  and  woman  were  "by  nature"  in  their 
unfallen  state.  Some  believe  that  there  was  not  simply 
one  "fall  of  man,"  but  that  this  sad  fact  has  been  re- 
peated in  the  history  of  every  human  being.  This  is 
true  in  a  sense,  of  course;  but  the  mournful  difference 
is  that  no  human  being  ever  fell  from  a  height  so 
lofty,  from  an  atmosphere  so  pure,  as  that  from  which 
our  first  parents  fell.  Every  child  is  born  at  the  place 
to  which  his  first  parents  fell,  though  many  of  them 
do  indeed  fall  thereafter  to  a  moral  level  lower  still. 
Children  are  a  great  deal  more  innocent  than  grown 
up  people.  It  may  indeed  be  said  of  them,  in  some 
respects,  that  "of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven"  here 
on  earth.  And  yet  there  is  something  the  matter  with 
them.  They  need  a  Savior  as  we  all  know;  and  if 
they  die  in  infancy  that  Savior,  to  whose  care  God  has 
committed  them,  sees  to  it  that  their  natures  are  fitted 


i8  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

for  heaven.  So  the  Cumberland  Presbj^terian  Church 
teaches.  It  is  not  Pelagian.  It  would  not  be  so  even 
if  it  had  no  logical  argument  to  the  contrary,  for  it 
does  not  think  it  safe  at  all,  in  so  important  a  matter 
as  this  to  try  to  work  out  its  mission  of  saving  men  by 
assuming  that  the  patient  is  at  the  outset  in  any  better 
moral  condition  than  he  may  after  all  really  be  in.  It 
is  best  to  asume  him  to  be,  even  if  we  cannot  prove  him 
to  be,  in  a  very  bad  condition,  such  as  no  mere  human 
and  outward  applications  can  reach. 

But  do  we  hold  that  sin  is  a  moral  disease  which  our 
first  parents  contracted,  and  transmitted  to  us?  Yes, 
such  is  our  misfortune,  but  it  is  none  the  less  also  our 
disease,  though  we  could  not  help  inheriting  it.  We 
have  even  made  it  worse  by  pretending  that  we  were  not 
afflicted,  or  by  finding  a  strange  pleasure  in  the  afflic- 
tion, or  in  some  other  equally  irrational  ways  which  I 
need  not  here  mention.  But  is  sin  nothing  but  a  dis- 
ease and  a  misfortune?  Yes,  it  is  a  good  deal  more 
than  that.  It  is  also  a  crime  of  the  deepest  dye.  It  is 
a  crime  against  the  most  holy  and  most  high  God. 
And  this  is  the  reason  why  another  name  for  sin  is  guilt. 
A  sinner  can  never  realize  his  need  of  pardon  who  never 
realizes  that  he  is  guilty.  Everything  that  is  obnoxious 
to  the  holy  and  righteous  and  loving  God,  is  criminal, 
and  hence  involves  guilt.  He  who  is  guilty  is  under 
condemnation;  and  this  is  true  of  "all  the  world."  Eom. 
iii.  19.  But  does  this  "all  the  world"  include  children? 
We  have  already  said  that  they  also  need  a  Savior.  God 
has  mercy,  surely,  on  the  children;  but  he  cannot  have 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  19 


mercy  on  those  wlio  need  no  mercy.  But  God's  court 
recognizes  degrees  of  guilt,  and  mitigating,  circum- 
stances, just  as  do  human  courts;  and,  hence,  whatever 
may  be  said  of  children  as  compared  with  grown  up  and 
hardened  criminals,  of  course  some  things  may  be 
afhrmed  of  the  latter  which  cannot  be  of  the  former. 

So  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  teaches,  as  1 
have  always  understood,  that  sin  does  not  consist  simply 
in  sinning,  just  as  the  will  does  not  consist  simply  in 
willing,  and  just  as  moral  character  does  not  consist 
simply  in  doing  right  or  wrong.  A  man  has  a  will 
when  he  is  neither  willing  nor  wishing;  he  has  a  charac- 
ter, good  or  bad,  when  he  is  doing  neither  right  noi- 
wrong;  if  he  is  a  sinner  he  is  a  sinner  when  in  most  un- 
conscious sleep,  as  well  as  when  engaged  in  most  con- 
scious acts  of  wickedness.  And  hence  Cumberland 
Presbyterians  believe  that  regeneration  goes  deeper  than 
reformation,  and  that  it  cannot  be  effected  by  any  out- 
ward appliances.  Outward  appliances  cannot  even  con- 
tribute to  it,  any  more  than  an  eye-salve  can  cure  heart 
diseases  or  pulmonary  consumption.  It  cannot,  there- 
fore, seem  otherwise  than  strange  to  Cumberland  Pres- 
byterians that  any  one  should  suppose  for  a  moment 
that  this  chnrnoter  of  the  c'linor  rnn  be  rhnria"ed.  or  this 
regeneration  effected  either  partly  or  wholly,  by  the  ex- 
ternal application  of  water,  as  it  seems  the  Episcopa- 
lians, Campbellites,  and  some  others,  "do  vainly  teach." 

It  seems  to  us  that  the  more  nearly  a  sinner  can  be 
induced  to  put  the  proper  valuation  upon  his  own  guilt 
and  helplessness  as  a  sinner,  the  more  likely  will  he  be 


20  OURDOCTRlJSEti. 

to  appreciate  aright  the  Savior.  No  man  can  ever  as- 
cend to  the  saving  recognition  of  Christ  who  does  not 
first  descend  to  tlie  condemning  recognition  of  liimself 
as  guilty  and  helpless.  We  are  willing  to  believe,  there- 
fore, that  moral  obligation  is  not  limited  by  moral  abil- 
ity. In  other  words,  we  ought  to  do  some  things  winch 
we  are  utterly  unable  to  do,  and  if  they  be  not  done  we 
remain  under  condemnation.  This  looks  like  a  sad  and 
<1  ireful  situation;  and  that  is  just  the  thing  which  we 
wish  the  poor  sinner  to  think  about  it,for  if  there  is  any- 
thing in  this  world  that  will  make  him  hasten  to  Christ 
this  will  do  it.  The  holy  law  of  God  says  do  this, 
and  this,  and  do  it  perfectly  and  cordially.  But  he  has 
not  done  it,  and  he  cannot  do  it,  and  only  as  he  realizes 
this  can  Christ  come  to  his  rescue.  He  unites  himself 
to  the  sinner  and  the  sinner  becomes  united  to  him,  and 
henceforth  and  on  that  account  the  sinner  is  both  saved 
and  safe.  In  saying  the  things  in  this  last  paragraph, 
some  facts  of  immense  import  are  condensed  into  a  few 
sentences;  but  as  I  am  speaking  of  sin  here  rather  than 
or  sah^ation,  I  cannot  at  this  place  unfold  them  further. 
I  refer  to  them  here  because  this  matter  of  moral  obli- 
gation which  we  are  unable  to  meet,  renders  it  neces- 
sarv  for  me  to  say  that  Cumberland  Presbyterianism, 
like  the  Apostle  Paul,  refuses  to  inculcate  the  slightest 
degree  of  self -righteousness  or  self-praise  because  of  a 
partial  obedience.  Its  motto  on  this  subject  is,  "All  to 
Christ  I  owe;"  and  when  it  says,  "Unto  him  be  all  the 
pjaise,"  it  says  it  consistently  and  in  good  faith. 


IV. 

What  Think  We  of  Christ? 

That  is  the  next  topic.  By  Christ  we  mean  him  wJio 
became  flesh,  or  incarnate,  in  the  person  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth.  Christ  is  his  official  and  redemptive  name, 
Jesus  is  his  individual  and  personal  name.  If  we 
should  speak  of  him  in  respect  to  his  eternal  relation 
to  the  Father  his  name  woukl  he  ''The  Son."  If  we 
should  speak  of  him  as  the  one  through  whom  God  is 
revealed,  his  name  would  he  Logos  or  Word.  If  we 
should  speak  of  him  as  one  who  is  himself  God  with 
us,  we  would  call  him  Immanuel.  All  these  are  his 
Bible  names. 

The  old  Arians  used  to  say  that  Christ  is  a  divine  per- 
son, and  some  modern  Unitarians  say  the  same.  But 
we  say  that  he  is  not  only  divine,  but  true  deity.  We 
are  liable  to  be  misled  when  we  hear  a  modern  Unita- 
rian affirm  the  divinity  of  Christ,  for  he  does  not  mean 
by  divinity,  in  this  case,  what  we  mean  by  it.  Divinity 
may  mean,  does  mean,  as  used  by  some,  simply  a  high 
degree  of  godlikeness.  But  it  is  easy  to  see  that  any 
one  may  be  ver^^  godlike  without  in  any  sense  being 
God.  A  good  man  is  somewhat  godlike;  Gabriel  is 
godlike  is  a  still  higher  degree;  Christ,  as  some  teach, 
is  godlike  in  a  still  higher  degree,  while  others  say  that 


22  OUR.  DOCTRINES. 

he  was  simply  the  best  man  that  ever  lived  on  earth. 
This  is  not  a  question  of  curious  speculation^  but  one  of 
great  practical  as  well  as  doctrinal  importance.  It 
would  be  a  sad  day  for  this  wicked  world  if  all  the 
churches  in  Christendom  should  suddenly  abandon 
their  exalted  doctrine  concerning  Christ.  I  think 
there  would  undoubtedly  be  a  gradual  relapse  into  a 
state  of  worldwide  heathenism.  For  this  practical 
reason,  and  for  otliers  which  I  cannot  argue  here,  the 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  honestly  believes  that 
Christ  is  true,  real,  Deity.  The  Word  was  God;  the 
Word  was  with  God.  These  are  two  things  which  the 
Bible  says  about  him.  John  i.  1.  He  was  God,  and  he 
was  with  God.  But  this  does  not  mean,  of  course,  that 
he  was  with  himself.  Cumberland  Presbyterians,  like 
every  body  who  reads  the  Bible,  are  obliged  to  interpret 
it,  otherwise  they  might  as  well  read  it  in  an  unknown 
tongue.  Those  interpretations  which  teach  that  the 
one  God,  the  one  eternal  spiritual  Essence,  has  existed 
eternally  as  a  trinity  of  Persons,  seem  to  them  by  far 
the  most  acceptable.  So  therefore  they  teach.  Con- 
sidered as  one  of  these  infinite  and  eternal  Persons  the 
uame  of  Christ  is  "The  Son,''  as  I  have  said,  or  "The 
Second  Person,"  as  he  is  often  called  when  we  are  not 
aiming  to  speak  in  Bible  terms.  But  the  two  names  de- 
note the  same  thing,  and  any  reader  or  speaker  is  en- 
titled to  his  preference  provided  he  does  not  attach 
false  meanings  to  it.  So  far  then  as  the  person  of 
Christ,  as  distinguished  from  his  natures,  is  concerned, 
we  say  that  it  is  divine  in  the  same  sense  that  we  apply 


OUR  DOCTRINES, 


that  term  to  God  the  Father  or  to  the  Holy  Spirit- 
eternal  and  infinite  in  all  his  attributes,  these  attributes 
being  the  same  as  those  which  we  affirm  of  the  other 
persons  of  the  one  Godhead. 

But  what  of  the  natures  of  Christ?  Prior  to  his  in- 
carnation, that  is,  before  he  "became  flesh,"  as  Jesus  of 
Nazareth,  he  had  only  one,  and  that  was  his  divine 
nature;  while  he  was  on  earth  he  had  two  natures,  the 
human  and  the  divine;  and  he  still  has  these  two 
natures.  He  has  not  a  body  to-day  like  that  wliich  he 
had  when  he  was  on  earth,  at  least  not  like  it  in  every 
respect,  but  he  is  still  as  human  as  he  was  then,  and  he 
is  just  as  divine  as  he  was  before  the  worlds  existed. 
The  difference  between  him  as  he  was  before  and  after 
he  took  upon  himself  human  nature  lies  in  the  fact  that 
before  that  event  the  divine  personality  acted  through 
only  one  nature  and  afterward  it  acts  through  two. 
This  is  substantially  the  teaching  not  only  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church,  but  also  of  the  other 
evangelical  churches.  The  Unitarians  do  not  teach 
it,  and  one  or  two  other  denominations  who  do  not  con- 
sider it  to  be  their  duty  to  teach  anvthing  except  the 
importance  of  making  public  confession  and  submission 
to  one  or  two  ritps  of  the  Church.  Christ  is  truly  hu- 
man and  truly  divine. 

But  do  our  members  have  to  'believe  these  things? 
Ko;  they  ought  to,  but  they  do  not  have  to.  A  knowl- 
edge of  them  is,  of  course,  not  essential  to  salvation; 
and  many  Cumberland  Presbyterians,  and  members  of 
other  churches,  have  lived  and  died,  and  gone  to  glory. 


24  OUB  DOCTRINES. 


who  haA^e  scarcely  heard  of  these  fi^reat  truths  and  facts. 
But  that  does  not  imply  that  they  are  valueless,  any 
more  than  the  fact  that  many  a  ^ood  Cliristian  has 
never  had  the  opportunity  of  attending  the  Wednesday 
evening  prayer  meetino-  proves  that  the  meeting^  is  value- 
less. These  oreat  doctrines  are  indeed  a  means  of 
grace  to  the  conrmon  Christian  who  can  make  the 
proper  use  of  them,  just  as  the  worship  of  God  in  his 
sanctuary  is  a  means  of  grace  to  him  who  eno^ages  in  it 
aright.  That  is  the  reason  why  I  said  a  moment  ago, 
that  whereas  every  member  of  the  church  does  not  have 
to  believe  the  great  doctrines,  he  nevertheless  ought  to 
do  so.  But  especially  should  the  teachers  in  the  church 
know  of  them  and  believe  them — those  unto  whom  is 
committed  the  oversiglit  of  the  flock  of  Christ. 

I  cannot,  without  going  beyond  the  boundary  pre- 
scribed by  these  papers,  present  even  briefly  the  process 
by  which  these  doctrines  are  reached.  And  this  is  not 
the  place  for  that.  But  I  may  add  this  practical  sen- 
tence concerning  the  one  of  which  1  was  speaking  last: 
It  is  so  nearly  fundamental  to  the  whole  Christian  sys- 
tem that  if  it  were  displaced  the  whole  would  fall. 
Christ  applies  to  himself  the  words  "  chief  corner 
stone;"  but,  as  we  all  know,  if  he  were  not  what  he  is 
he  could  not  be  that.  He  stands  in  an  altogether  dif- 
ferent relation  to  Christianity  from  that  in  which  Mo- 
hammed and  Buddha  stand  to  their  respective  religions, 
and  the  reason  is,  he  himself  differs  in  toto  from  Mo- 
bammed  or  Buddha. 


Concerning  the  Work  of  Christ. 

What  shall  we  say  now  of  Christ's  work?  This, 
in  part.  If  he  had  not  wrought  in  the  flesh  and  if  he 
did  not  still  work  ont  of  the  flesh,  no  man 
could  ever  have  been  saved  and  no  man  ever 
could  be  saved.  This  statement,  however,  empha- 
sizes the  necessity  of  his  work,  and  not  its  nature. 
We  believe  that  Christ  himself  is  the  Way,  the  Truth, 
and  the  Life,  but  we  believe  also  that  he  is  these  to  us 
in  virtue  of  what  he  did  and  still  does  for  us.  If  Ga- 
briel had  come  down  and  lived  as  Christ  lived,  taught 
as  he  taught,  suffered  as  he  suffered,  died  as  he  died, 
it  could  not  have  proved  effective.  Man  would  still 
have  been  without  redemption.  Christ  did  what  no 
other  being  in  the  universe  could  have  accomplished, 
and  the  reason  why  he  succeeded  lies  first  of  all  in  the 
fact  that  he  was  (and  is)  Christ. 

But  what  offices,  or  works,  does  Christ  execute  as  our 
Redeemer?  Christ,  as  our  Redeemer,  our  catechism 
rightly  says,  "executes  the  office  of  a  prophet,  of  a 
priest,  and  of  a  king,  both  in  his  estate  of  humiliation 
and  exaltation."  As  a  general  statement,  I  do  not  see 
just  how  this  could  be  improved.  Christ  was  our 
prophet,  priest,  and  king,  when  he_  was  on  earth  in  the 
flesh,  and  he  is  these  still.     But  how  does  Christ  exe- 


26  OTJB  DOCTRINES. 


cute  the  office  of  a  prophet?  He  does  this  "in  reveal- 
ing to  US  by  his  word  and  Spirit,  the  will  of  God  for  our 
salvation."  When  he  was  on  earth  he  did  this  in  per- 
son in  his  teachings.  Since  his  ascension  he  does  it  by 
his  Holy  Spirit  who  so  quickens  and  enlightens  our  un- 
derstandings that  we  may  perceive  the  spiritual  truth 
in  the  word,  which  spiritual  truth  cannot  be  otherwise 
than  spiritually  discerned.  In  the  expression  "the  will 
of  God,"  in  the  answer  just  quoted,  what  we  may  call 
the  character  of  God  is  of  course  included.  Christ 
makes  him  known  to  us  as  holy,  just,  loving,  etc.,  pre- 
senting to  us  no  distorted  or  mutilated  vision  of  him, 
but  one  complete  in  all  his  attributes,  and  who  in  a 
special  and  precious  sense  is  the  Father  of  them  that 
believe.  If  Christ  had  not  wTOUght  this  revealing  and 
instructive  work  as  a  prophet,  and  kept  it  up  by  his 
Spirit,  it  would  have  been  as  well  had  all  his  other  work 
been  done  secretly.  It  could  have  taken  no  hold  on 
men's  minds  and  hearts,  and  all  the  world  would  have 
been  in  the  same  relation  to  it  as  the  heathen. 

But  how  does  Christ  execute  his  office  of  priest?  In 
answer  our  catechism  again  rightly  says:  "Christ  exe- 
cutes the  office  of  a  priest  in  having  once  offered  him- 
self a  sacrifice  for  sin,  in  reconciling  us  to  God,  and  in 
making  continual  intercessions  for  us."  In  respect 
to  the  first  clause  of  this  answer,  we  may  refer  to  the 
equivalent  but  fuller  statement  in  sec.  31  of  our  Confes- 
sion, where  it  is  said  that  Christ,  by  his  perfect  obedience 
and  sacrifice  became  a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world.     Like   the    terms    father    and    son,  for 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  27 


example,  the  terms  propitiation  and  expiation  imply 
each  other.  There  cannot  be  one  without  the  other. 
Each  is  virtually  defined  in  terms  of  the  other.  God 
is  propitiated  when  sin  is  expiated,  and  sin  is  expiated 
when  Grod  is  propitiated.  Probably  every  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  would  affirm  the  truth  of  these  statements; 
but  not  one  of  them,  in  using  the  word  propitiation, 
would,  of  course,  wish  to  be  imderstood  as  intimating 
that  God  is  a  vengeful  tyrant.  If  he  had  not  loved  the 
fallen  world  with  a  Godlike  love,  he  would  not  have  put 
forth  what  we  may  reverently  call  a  Godlike  effort  to 
save  it.  The  measure  of  his  love  was  the  reluctance 
(if  we  may  speak  humanly),  with  w^hich  he  yielded  up 
his  Son.  John  iii.  16.  The  priestly  work  of  Christ 
on  earth  was  as  wide  as  the  world  and  the  ages  both  in 
its  intention  and  its  sufficiency.  But  Cumberland 
Presbyterians  do  not  teach  that  all  men  will  be  saved. 
We  wish  we  could  so  teach.  But  the  reason  why  we 
cannot  does  not  lie  in  God.  "How  often  would  I,"  he 
says,  "and  ye  would  not."  Matt,  xxiii.  37.  I  suppose 
that  we  can  never  know  in  this  world  or  the  next  how 
deep  and  keen  is  the  grief  of  Christ  because  so  many 
sinners  reject  him.  But  the  church  is  not  to  be  held 
responsible  for  this  humanistic  statement,  though  sure- 
ly there  must  be  a  mournful  and  mysterious  fact  cor- 
responding to  it.  Christ  is  as  human  to-day  as  he  was 
when  he  sat  on  the  brow  of  Olivet,  overlooking  with 
prophetic  vision  the  sinful  city  which  he  loved  so  well. 
And  yet  "he  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and  shall 
be  satisfied."     Isa.  liii.  11.     "He  ever  liveth  to  make  in- 


28  OUR  DOCTRINES. 


tercession/^  and  "is  able  to  save  them  to  the  uttermost 
that  come  imto  God  by  him."  Heh.  vii.  24,  25.  No 
others  can  he  save. 

Not  only  is  he  "a  priest  forever;"  he  is  also  king. 
But  how  does  he  execute  the  olfice  or  work  of  a  king? 
I  answer  again  by  quoting  our  catechism:  "Christ  ex- 
ecutes the  office  of  a  king  in  ruling  and  defending  u», 
and  in  restraining  and  conquering  all  his  and  our  en- 
emies." He  does  it  also — or  I  may  rather  say,  that  is 
— in  calling  out  of  the  world  a  people  to  himself,  known 
as  the  church;  in  giving  them  officers,  laws,  and  cen- 
sures when  they  need  them,  by  which  he  visibly  governs 
those  who  have  once  become  attached  unto  him,  or 
united  with  him,  by  faith  in  bestowin^^  abiding  saving 
grace;  in  rewarding-  their  obedience  and  t-orreci- 
ing  them  for  their  sins;  in  preserving-  and  sup- 
porting them,  under  all  their  temptations  and  suffer- 
ings; and  in  causing  all  things  to  work  together  for 
their  good  and  his  glory.  It  is  probable  that  our  Meth- 
odist and  Episcopal  friends  who  deny  the  doctrine  of 
"inamissible  grace"  and  insert  in  its  place  the  doctrine 
of  total  and  final  apostasy,  would  move  to  strike  out 
of  the  above  list  of  Christ's  kingly  functions  the  clause 
beginning,  "in  bestowing  abiding  saving  grace."  It  de- 
volves on  me  here,  not  to  argue,  but  simply  to  say  that 
while  Cumberland  Presbyterians  teach,  of  course,  that 
those  who  have  once  become  savingly  united  to  Christ, 
may  grievously  backslide,  they  believe  that  the  Scrip- 
tures teach  that  Christ,  in  the  exercise  of  his  kingly 
office,  will  see  to  it  that  none  are  finally  lost.     But  we 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  29 

shall  necessarily  have  to  allude  to  this  subject  again 
under  another  head. 

Christ's  priestly  work  on  earth  and  in  heaven  is  the 
ground,  the  essential  antecedent,  of  all  the  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  looking  to  our  complete  salvation  and  glori- 
fication. It  is  on  this  ground  that  he  reproves  or  con- 
victs the  world  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of  judg- 
ment. John  xvi.  8.  Apart  from  this  priestly  work 
neither  repentance  nor  faith  could  ever  be  effected  or 
produced  in  the  heart  of  the  sinner.  It  is  the  ground 
of  the  Holy  Spirit's  work  of  regeneration.  It  is  the 
ground  of  justification.  It  is  the  ground  upon  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  aids  the  believer  in  his  work  of  progressive 
sanctification.  It  is,  in  short,  the  thing  without  which 
nothing  else  whatever  in  the  whole  scheme  of  redemp- 
tion, or  in  the  whole  process  of  salvation,  would  ever  take 
place.  Apart  from  this  ground  on  which  to  move  every 
redemptive  agency  in  the  universe  would  be  silent  and 
motionless.  The  Holy  Spirit  would  retire  back  into 
eternity  into  the  society  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  who 
sent  him.  Every  call  of  the  ministry  of  the  gospel 
would  be  withdrawn;  every  house  of  God  would  be 
closed,  and  every  pulpit  silent.  Every  regenerate  soul 
would  relapse  back  into  its  original  state.  Our  civiliza- 
zation  would  become  savag-er>^  aur]  Satan,  that  old 
Dragon,  would  stalk  up  and  down  this  world  tyrannizing 
over  his  victims  without  hindrance.  Truly,  of  Christ  it 
may  be  said  again,  "All  to  him  we  owe."  And,  if  I  may 
speak  a  truth  in  figure,  his  scarred  hands  are  a  perpet- 
ual intercession  for  us  all. 


VI. 

Predestination,  Justification,  Regeneration. 

Having  written  oi  the  work  of  Christ  to  the  extent  of 
our  hniit  let  us  now  consider  briefly  its  application  in 
the  actual  salvation  of  men.  Dr.  Beard  in  his  Theology 
devotes  125  pages  to  the  subject  of  predestination.  He 
says  that  as  the  word  is  usually  understood  Cumberland 
Presbyterians  have  no  doctrine  of  predestination.  This 
is  true.  Dr.  Beard  teaches,  however,  that  we  have  a 
doctrine  on  this  subject,  though  it  does  not  occur  as  a 
formal  and  explicit  article  in  our  Confession.  Our  ar- 
ticles on  the  '^preservation  of  believers"  imply  it.  Of 
course  also  we  believe  that  Eom.  viii.  29  and  Eph.  i.  5 
teach  something  on  the  subject  of  predestination.  They 
are  affirmative  sentences,  and  not  negative  ones.  The 
one  says  that  God  "predestinated  us  unto  the  adoption 
of  children  by  Jesus  Christ  to  himself,"  etc.  The  other 
says  that  "whom  he  did  foreknow  he  also  did  predesti- 
nate to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  liis  Son,"  etc. 
Both  these  propositions  are  addressed  to  persons  who 
are  already  Christians,  just  as  Phil.  ii.  12,  13  is;  and  of 
course  Cumberland  Presbyterians  believe  the  Bible. 
Such  verses  as  these  are  the  good  logical  foundation  of 
our  doctrine  of  the  preservation  of  the  believer,  or  the 
"final  perseverance  of  the  saints."       But  the  question 


OUR  DOCTRlNEti.  31 


might  arise,  Is  tJiis  i)reclestinatioii  imconditioual?  Our 
answer  is,  These  verses  themselves  do  not  say  that  it  is, 
then  why  should  we?  It  is  true  that  God's  determina- 
tion to  take  care  of  the  believer  in  Christ,  seeing  to  it 
that  he  is  not  finally  lost,  is  a  matter  of  i:)ure  gi^ace  on 
his  part;  no  power  or  authority  outside  of  himself  makes 
him  do  it.  In  this  sense  of  course  it  is  a  sovereign  and 
unconditional  act.  But  the  word  "unconditional"  is 
usually  understood  to  mean  that,  of  two  men,  for  in- 
stance, irrespective  of  their  relation  to  Christ,  God  pre- 
destinated one  to  eternal  life  and  the  other  to  etenial 
death.  This  sort  of  unconditional  predestination  Cum- 
berland Presbyterians  do  not  believe.  AVe  may  add  that 
this  species  of  predestination  of  some  unto  eternal  life 
inevitably  implies  a  like  unconditional  predestination  of 
others  unto  eternal  damnation.  It  is  not  a  mere  neg- 
ative "passing  over;"  for,  according  to  the  system  which 
holds  this  view,  God  cannot  foreknow  that  an  event 
will  come  to  pass  unless  he  has  decreed  that  it  shall  come 
to  pass — from  which  it  of  course  follows  that  he  could 
not  foreknow  that  a  given  sinner  will  finally  be  lost  un- 
less he  has  decreed  that  he  shall  be  lost.  But  he  knows 
it,  therefore  he  decreed  it.  This  is  not  our  doctrine. 
We  believe  that  whatever  God  predestinated  concern- 
ing the  finally  impenitent,  he  predestinated  concerning 
him  as  being  out  of  Christ;  and  whatever  opposite  things 
he  predestinated  concerning  another  man,  he  predesti- 
nated concerning  him  as  being  in  Christ.  The  doctrine 
of  our  Methodist  brethren  on  the  subject  of  "apostasy" 
— or,  more  properly  speaking,  the   doctrine   of  "amis- 


32  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

fciible  grace'" — looically  forbids  tliem  from  having  any 
doctrine  of  predestination  at  all. 

But,  as  we  are  obliged  to  be  brief,  let  ns  pass  on  and 
state  what  we  believe  concerning  regeneration.  It  is 
a  supernatural  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  which  the  heart 
is  radically  changed.  We  call  it  a  ^'renewal  in  spirit," 
a  making  one  to  be  a  "new  creature  in  Christ,"  a  being 
"born  of  the  Avill  of  God,"  etc.  We  mean  by  heart  or 
spirit  the  whole  inmost  purpose  of  the  man.  Regen- 
eration atfects^  not  merely  the  man's  conduct,  but  liim- 
self  in  the  inmost  seat  of  his  character  and  life;  it  af- 
fects him  in  the  immanent  and  permanent  state  of  liis 
will  and  affections.  Ps^•CJloloo•ica]lv  he  is  tlie  same  man, 
of  course;  if  he  was  John  Smith  before,  he  is  John 
Smith  after  regeneration.  But  the  trend  of  the  man,  his 
inmost  character,  liis  immanent  purpose,  or  whatever 
one  may  call  it,  is  not  the  same.  He  is  a  "new  man," 
born  from  above.  If  a  man  would  be  a  lawyer  he  must 
be  more  than  a  member  of  the  bar,  more  than  a  mere 
"practitioner."  He  must  have  the  traits,  the  mental 
habits,  the  immanent  mental  states,  of  a  lawyer;  other- 
wise he  is  "no  lawyer,"  no  matter  how  well  informed  in 
law  he  may  be.  He  must  be  of  the  judicial  type  of  a 
man,  as  distinguished  from  other  types.  Reo^eneration 
quickens  in  man  the  life  or  movement  wliich  ultimately 
brings  him  over  from  the  worldly  and  carnal  to  the  well 
defined  spiritual  type.  This  quickening  is  instanta- 
ueous,  and  is  accomplished,  not  by  water,  or  the  sacra- 
ments, not  by  human  power,  but  by  the  Holy  Spiiit. 
The  further  progress  of  the  movement,  after  the  in- 


OTJR  DOCTRINES,  33 

stantaneous  quickening  or  regeneration,  is  gradnal.  It 
is  called  sanctilication — progressive  sanctification.  We 
shall  speak  of  it  more  particularly  later  on. 

What,  now,  is  justification?  The  sinner  is  the  object 
of  the  justifying  act,  truly,  but  it  does  not  take  place  in 
the  sinner,  in  the  sense  that  regeneration  does,  but  out- 
side of  the  sinner,  at  Heaven's  court.  It  includes  not 
cidy  pardon,  but  also  restoration  to  God's  favor,  and 
the  enjoyment  of  the  privileges  of  sonsliip.  It  does  not 
cf.nsist  in  making  one  subjectively  righteous,  or  holy, 
or  innocent.  We  as  Cumberland  Presbyterians  reofard 
our  Confession  of  Faith  as  a  good  interpretation  of 
Scripture  on  this  subject.  It  says  that  justification  is 
accomplished,  "not  by  imputing  faith  itself — which 
means  that  we  do  not  believe  that  faith  and  righteous- 
nesr,  are  identical  things  called  bv  two  different  names. 
I'he  article  in  the  Confession  also  says  that  sinners  are 
not  justified  by  the  imputation  to  them  of  "any  other 
evangelical  obedience."  It  says  that  God  freely  justifies 
sinners  "by  imputing  the  obedience  and  satisfaction  of 
(■hrist  unto  them,  they  receiving  and  resting  on  liis 
righ+eousness  by  faith."  It  says  also  that  this  act  of 
God  is  "strictly  a  legal  transaction,"  and  "imparts  no 
normal  qualities  or  merits  to  the  believer,"  he  being  re- 
lieved from  punishment  and  received  into  the  divine 
favor  "for  Christ's  sake  alone."  In  heartily  believing 
all  this  we  are  in  the  good  company  of  the  framers,  not 
only  of  our  old,  but  also  of  our  Revised  Confession. 

Our  Methodist  brethren  do  not  quite  agree  with  us 
in  this  view  of  justification.     Rev.  Richard  Watson,  an 


34  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

eminent  Methodist  theologian^  says  that  our  faith  itself 
is  our  righteousness,  heing  imputed  to  us  as  such;  where- 
as our  Confession  says  that  the  obedience  and  satisfac- 
tion of  Christ  are  imputed  to  us  as  such.  See  Watson's 
Institutes,  voL  ii.  page  234;  our  Confession,  sections  48, 
49,  50;  Westminster  Confession,  chapter  xi.  Another 
difference  between  us  and  our  Methodist  friends  on  this 
subject  lies  in  our  difference  of  view  in  regard  to  faith 
in  its  relation  to  justification.  We  emphasize  it  in 
this  relation  rather  as  an  act  of  accepting  Christ  which 
results  in  our  permanent  justification;  they  emphasize 
it  ratlier  as  an  inward  state  on  our  part  which  is  reck- 
oned to  us  as  justification  or  righteousness  only  so 
long  as  we  are  in  that  state.  This  state  is  the  "grace 
from  which  we  may  "fall."  The  doctrine  of  "apostasy" 
is  therefore  logically  related  to  the  Methodist  doctrine 
of  justification,  but  it  is  not  logically  related  to  ours. 
Of  course  Ave  believe  that  faith  appears  as  an  inward 
state  of  trust,  but  this  is  not  what  we  mean  when  we 
speak  of  faith  as  the  instrumental  cause  of  justification. 
The  result  of  the  act  of  faith,  to  wit,  justification  in  our 
sense  of  the  word,  Ave  think  is  permanent;  hence  we  do 
not  believe  in  falling  from  this  grace.  But  the  synonym 
of  the  state  of  faith  or  trust,  to  wit,  justification  in  the 
other  sense  of  the  word,  lasts  only  so  long  as  that  state 
lasts.  Hence  our  Methodist  friends  do  believe  that  we 
may  fall  from  this  grace.  This  is  what  they  mean  by 
tkeir  doctrine  of  "apostasy,"  or  "amissible  grace."  We 
believe  that  true  Christians  may  sin,  or  pass  into  states 
of  spiritual  gloom  and  discouragement  on  account  of  a 


OU^DOOTRINES,  35 

faj-liire  to  trust  Christ,  but  we  do  not  believe  that  this 
ever  cancels  the  justifyino-  act  of  God  which  took  place 
on  the  occasion  of  the  sinner's  act  of  faith— that  is  to 
say,  his  act  of  accepting:  Christ  as  his  Lord  and  Savior. 
I  beheve  that  I  have  set  forth  these  two  views  of  justi- 
fication as  fairly  as  could  be  done  in  the  space  of  a  few 
words.  It  is  perhaps  needless  to  say  that  I  prefer  our 
own,  and  that  as  for  my  reader,  1  can  only  leave  him 
to  the  exercise  of  his  judgment.  I  may  add,  in  conclu- 
sion, that  the  Roman  Catholics  hold  still  a  different  view 
of  justification,  in  which  they  do  not  distin^ush,  as  good 
teachers  ought  to  do,  between  it  and  regeneration  and 
sanctification.  They  say  that  justification  consists  in 
the  infusion  of  God's  own  rightousness  into  the  soul  of 
the  sinner  so  that  it  becomes  the  property  or  charac- 
teristic of  that  soul.  The  reader  mav  easily  see  the  dif- 
ference between  this  view  and  our  own  as  presented  in 
our  Confession  of  Faith,  in  the  articles  from  which  we 
have  quoted. 


VII. 

Sacntification. 

Oiir  next  topic  is  sanctification.  What  is  it?  It  is 
not  reojeneration;  it  is  not  justification;  it  is  not  sinless 
perfection,  nor  the  "second  blessin^^  technically  so 
called.  There  is  no  such  thin^  in  the  creed  of  any 
church  as  the  do^ma  of  sanctification  in  the  sense  of  sin- 
less perfection;  nor  is  there  any  such  thino;  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  only  sense  in  which  sinless  perfection  is 
to  be  affirmed  of  anyone  is  a  relative  sense.  Some  men 
in  some  respects  are  better  than  others;  and  the  best 
are  the  first  ones  to  recognize  their  own  unworthiness. 
They  are  even  more  likely  perhaps  to  think  of  their  own 
sinfulness  than  of  the  sinfulness  of  their  brethren. 
Every  man  begins  the  Christian  hfe  by  pleading  the 
merits  of  Christ  rather  than  his  own;  and  the  only  way 
that  he  can  keep  on  being  a  Christian  is  to  keep  on 
pleadins"  the  merits  of  Christ  rather  than  his  own.  Far 
be  it  from  any  Christian  to  get  into  the  habit  of  depend- 
ing upon  his  experiences.  There  is  too  much  bad  min- 
gled with  the  best.  No  man  can  ever  get  away  from  his 
record.  If  he  is  a  sinner  once  he  is  a  sinner  forever; 
a  murderer  once,  a  murderer  forever.  There  is  an  im- 
portant sense  in  which  this  is  a  solemn,  even  an  awful 
truth,  and  probably  we  do  not  take  it  home  to  ourselves 


OUR  DOCTRINES,  37 


as  we  oudit.  I  think  if  we  did  we  would  appreciate 
ourselves  less  and  Christ  more.  If  one  of  our  fellow 
citizens  has  served  a  term  in  the  penitentiary  for  a  dis- 
graceful crime  committed  he  can  never  escape  that 
record,  though  this,  we  may  say,  is  due  to  our  want  of 
charitv.  Still  it  is  true  that  no  sinner  can  ever  escape 
his  record.  I  do  not  mean  to  teach,  of  course,  that  he 
ought  to  remain  hung  up  day  after  day  in  the  sorrow- 
ful memory  of  his  past;  but  it  is  there  nevertheless,  and 
every  once  and  awhile  it  will  look  humiliation  at  Mm 
from  behind  the  back  of  God  whither  it  has  been  cast. 
He  will  know  that  it  is  there.  David,  who  wrote  the 
most  penitential  of  psalms,  is  in  heaven  to-day;  but  he 
is  there  as  a  murderer  as  well  as  a  psalmist;  a  par- 
doned murderer,  to  be  sure,  but  none  the  less  a  mur- 
derer. He  had  to  plead  guilty  before  he  could  plead 
Christ.  Neither  regeneration,  nor  justification,  nor 
sanctification,  ever  wipes  out  or  annihilates  facts. 
The  effects  of  facts  may  be  neutralized,  or  counteracted, 
or  overlooked  in  some  way,  but  the  facts  themselves  are 
facts  forever.  If  a  man  has  once  stolen,  if  we  axe  mer- 
ciless enough  to  do  so  we  may  truly  say  of  him  ever 
afterward,  "You  thief,"  no  matter  how  penitent  and 
pious  he  may  become.  It  is  love  and  mercy  that  pre- 
vent us  from  doing  it.  So  it  is  the  case  of  the  peni- 
tent, pardoned,  and  regenerated  sinner  against  God. 
His  character  is  changed,  but  his  personal  identity  is 
not.  And  when  we  speak  so  gratefully  and  so  truly  of 
Christ's  washing  all  our  sins  away,  or  all  our  guilt,  we 
do  not  mean  that  he  washes  away  our  culpabihty  or 


38  OUR  DOCTBINES. 

unworthiness.  While  there  is  an  important  sense  in 
which  the  sinner  must  be  fitted  for  heaven,  he  will 
never  a^ree,  I  should  think,  that  apart  from  Christ  he 
is  fit  for  heaven.  If  Christ  should  turn  against  the 
saved  sinner  a  million  years  hence,  that  saved  sinner 
would  immediately  he  undone.  His  criminal  and 
polluted  record,  made  before  he  was  saved  and  after, 
would  instantly  leap  in  vengeance  from  behind  the  back 
of  God.  The  old  scores  would  ruin  him  inevitably.  It 
is  only  Christ  who  keeps  them  in  the  back  ground. 
Think  thyself  a  sinner,  good  man,  however  perfect 
God  may  know  thee  to  be.  Put  thy  mouth  in  the  dust, 
and  honestly  cry  as  did  the  prophet  of  old,  unholy,  un- 
holy. It  will  be  the  best  testimony  in  thine  own  favor 
that  thou  couldst  possibly  give,  whether  wittingly  or  un- 
wittingly. My  lamp  is  brighter  in  the  darkness  than 
it  is  in  the  light  of  noonday.  The  nearer  we  approach, 
in  our  own  attainments,  the  ineffable  brightness  of 
God's  holiness  the  less  holy  does  our  own  holiness 
seem.  I  may  think  I  can  write  well,  until  I  see  my 
writing  side  by  side  with  one  which  is  far  better  than 
mine.  Then  I  am  humbled.  I  think  the  Apostle  Peter 
must  have  been  influenced  by  this  fact  once,  when  he 
said,  "Depart  from  me,  for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  0  Lord." 
That  Avas  his  vigorous  way  of  saying  that  he  had  caught 
a  larger  and  more  brilliant  glimpse  than  usual  of 
Christ's  perfect  holiness,  and  his  own  seemed  dark  in 
comparison.  If  Christ  had  frequently  flashed  out  the 
brilliant  reality  of  his  holiness,  I  suppose  that  even  the 
poor  disciples  would  have  been  discouraged  and  driven 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  39 

away  from  him,  to  say  nothing  of  the  poor  pubHcans 
and  sinners.  He  had  to  insist  that  he  was  the  Son  of 
man,  in  order  that  they  might  at  last  know  that  he  was 
the  Son  of  God.  He  had  to  conceal  in  order  that  he 
might  reveal. 

But  what  is  sanctiflcation  then?  Of  course  any  man 
may  put  upon  any  word  whatever  meaning  he  may 
choose  to  put  upon  it,  and  go  about  using  it  in  that 
sense.  But  in  theologv.  as  in  cverv  otlicr  science,  cer- 
tain words  have  several  accepted  meanings.  Sometimes 
the  same  word  in  English  is  represented  bv  several  dif- 
ferent words  in  the  Greek  or  Hebrew  Scriptures.  And 
sometimes  again  the  etymologv  of  a  word  is  not  worth 
any  thing  whatever  in  determining  its  meaning  in  a 
given  passage  or  connection.  This  is  true  in  English, 
and  also  in  Hebrew,  Greek,  Latin,  and  other  literatures. 
Words  sometimes,  oftentimes  indeed,  grow  far  away 
from  their  birthplace,  just  as  a  man  may  outgrow  the 
humble  circumstances  of  his  childhood.  It  matters 
nothing,  so  far  as  the  Scriptures  are  concerned,  or  so  far 
as  the  church  doctrine  of  sanctiflcation  is  concerned,  to 
say  that  the  word  comes  from  sanctus  holy  and  facio  to 
make.  Any  body  can  know  that  by  looking  in  a  dic- 
tionary. A  church  doctrine  is  formulated  not  merely, 
sometimes  perhaps  not  at  all,  by  consulting  etymolo- 
gies, but  by  ascertaining  the  whole  trend  of  Scripture 
teaching,  as  presented  even  in  passages  where  the  given 
word  does  not  occur  at  all.  All  Christians  in  the  apos- 
tolic days  were  called  "holy  ones"  or  saints.  This  was 
one  of  their  common  titles,  just  as  we  call  them  "breth- 


40  0 UR  DOCTRINES. 

ren,"  or  "Cliristians/'  But  it  would  be  wrong  to  argue 
from  this  that  in  the  days  of  the  apostles  they  were 
"sanctified"  in  the  sense  in  which  that  word  is  now  often 
misused.  It  is  well  known  that  some  of  these  holy  ones 
were  notoriously  unholy  or  imperfect,  as  at  Corinth,  for 
instance. 

As  a  church  doctrine — and  the  church  is  supposed  to 
get  its  doctrines  from  the  Bible — sanctification  denotes 
in  the  first  place  consecration  to  God,  and  then,  in  the 
case  of  Christians,  continuous  growth  in  grace,  as 
the  result  of  this  consecration.  So  far  as  the  ofiftcial 
teachings  of  the  Protestant  Churches  are  concerned, 
there  is  great  unanimity  on  tliis  subject,  however,  nu- 
merous may  be  the  individuals  in  some  who  dissent. 
The  official  teaching,  as  contained  in  creeds,  catechisms, 
etc.,  represents  the  concensus.  If  a  member  of 
a  church  thinks  that  he  is  obliged  to  dissent 
from  tliis  concensus,  he  has  the  right  to  do  so;  but 
in  this  day  and  time,  when  all  are  equally  uninspired, 
if  the  dissenting  man  can  remain  with  his  church  with- 
out disturbing  it,  he  ought  to  do  so;  but  if  he  cannot 
he  ought  to  Avithdraw.  That  is  the  way  Luther  did. 
Any  church  member  is  taking  upon  himself  a  great  re- 
sponsibility when  he  undertakes  to  reverse  the  long  es- 
tablished faith  of  a  whole  Christian  denomination.  The 
one  man  may  be  wrong,  and  the  many  right. 

Certainly  we  are  commanded  to  be  holy  even  as  God  is 
holy;  to  be  perfect  even  as  our  Father  wliich  is  in 
heaven  is  perfect.  What  lower  standard  could  have 
possibly  been  set?     But  we  cannot  attain  unto  it.     It 


OUR  DOCTRINES.  41 

is  be3^ond  the  utmost  reach  of  us  little  ones.  But  we 
can  desire  to  reach  it,  and  we  can  make  progress  even  in 
this  life.  We  can  grow  in  grace  and  all  the  graces  can 
grow  in  us.  That  is, we  can  grow  in  grace  if  we  ap- 
propriate to  ourselves  the  nutritious  means  of  grace,  liv- 
ing at  first  perhaps  only  on  the  sincere  or  unadulterated 
milk  of  the  word,  and  afterward  also  on  the  stronger 
meat.  And  the  graces  can  also  grow  in  us  provided 
the  soil  be  adapted  to  their  growth.  But  alas,  so  many 
of  the  good  seeds  do  fall  on  ground  wherein  they  cannot 
grow.  Still,  it  is  the  privilege  of  every  true  Christian 
to  realize  in  liimself  this  continuous  growth.  However 
much  better  any  one  may  really  be  than  his  brethren 
— and  some  no  doubt  are  holier  than  others — sad  is  it 
for  him  who  is  willing  to  say  of  himself,  "See  how  large 
I  am,'*  or  who  is  willing  to  affirm  that  he  has  attained  to 
the  perfect  standard.  If  in  the  ages  hence  he  should 
compare  himself,  as  he  may  be  then,  with  himself  as  he 
is  now  even  at  his  best,  in  shame  I  suppose  he  would 
hastily  turn  his  eyes  away.  There  would  be 
so  many  bkck,  and  foul,  and  dismal  spots 
on  the  escutcheon  of  his  ancient  glory.  And 
if  he  should  compare  himself  then  with  the 
holy  Christ,  he  also  as  do  the  great  angels 
whom  we  call  holy,  would  prostrate  himself  before  the 
throne  and  say  of  himself,  "Unholy,  unholy,"  and  of 
him  that  sitteth  upon  the  throne,  "Holy,  holv.  holy,  is 
the  Lord  of  hosts."  We  have  never  seen  any  holiness 
in  this  world,  all  that  we  call  by  that  name  being 
only  the  faint  and  far  away  image  of  it.     How  then  can 


42  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

any  one  venture  to  sa}^  that  he  is  perfectly  sanctified? 
Ought  he  not  rather  to  how  Ms  head  in  shame? 

It  is  easy  to  see,  then,  from  this  description  of  the 
doctrine  of  sanctification,  the  difference  between  it  and 
other  doctrines  of  grace  which  we  have  also  briefly 
described.  Eegeneration  is  a  spiritual  quickening; 
sanetification  is  a  spiritual  consecration  and  growth. 
Eegeneration  is  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  our  saneti- 
fication is  accomplished  by  ourselves  with  the  aid  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  use  of  the  means  of  grace.  It  is 
this  that  the  apostle  has  in  mind  when  life  says,  "Work 
out  your  own  salvation."  Phil.  ii.  12,  13.  Regenera- 
tion is  essentially  an  instantaneous  work;  sanetification 
is  progressive,  as  the  light  shineth  more  and  more  as 
it  approaches  the  perfect  day.  Eegeneration  is  as  the 
quickening  of  the  seed;  sanetification  is  its  subsequent 
development  and  growth.  So,  they  both  differ  from 
justification.  Eegeneration  and  sanetification  take 
place  in  us;  justification  takes  place  at  Heaven's  court, 
it  being  we  here  who  are  justified  there — not  because  we 
are  really  guiltless,  but  for  Christ's  sake.  Eegeneration 
and  sanetification  are  moral  or  spiritual  works;  justifica- 
tion "is  strictly  a  legal  transaction."  Thus  do  the 
Protestant  Churches  teach  on  this  subject,  their  teach- 
ings being  embodied  in  what  we  may  caU  their  official 
utterances.  These  churches  are  composed  of  learned 
and  devout  men  whose  only  purpose  and  desire  is  to 
know  the  truth  and  promulgate  it. 


VIII. 

The  Church. 

We  come  now  to  speak  of  the  church.  The  church 
is  supposed  to  have  a  doctrine  concerning  itself.  It 
surely  ought  to  have,  if  it  would  do  its  work  intelli- 
gently and  well  in  other  respects.  "Know  thyself"  is  in 
substance  a  Scriptural  injunction,  and  it  may  be  truly 
regarded  as  addressed  not  only  to  the  individual  Chris- 
tian, but  also  to  the  aggregate  and  organized  body  of 
Christians  called  the  Church.  The  injunction  needs 
to  be  emphasized.  Our  Confession  of  Faith  states  the 
well  known  distinctions  between  the  visible  and  iuvis- 
ible  church,  which  I  need  not  quote  here.  It  also  applies 
the  word  church  to  a  single  organized  congregation  of 
Christians;  and  to  an  organized  collection  of  anv  num- 
ber of  such  congregations,  often  called  a  "Christian  de- 
nomination." If  there  were  only  one  or  two  Christians 
on  earth  they  could  still  be  spoken  of  as  "the  church." 
And  we  also  speak  of  the  church  militant  and  the 
church  triumphant,  meaning  by  the  former  the  num- 
ber of  God's  people  who  are  still  on  earth  at  any  given 
time,  and  by  the  latter  those  who  are  in  heaven  and 
whose  struggles  have  terminated  in  victory.  All  these 
senses  of  the  word  are  recognized  in  Christian  litera- 
ture, and  most  of  them,  if  not  all,  are  found  in  the  ITew 
Testament.  But  there  is  a  unity  in  the  variety,  just 
as  there  must  be  something  in  common  with  a  rose,  and 


44  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

a  poem,  and  a  mathematical  demonstration,  and  a  piece 
of  moral  conduct,  which  justifies  us  in  calling  them  aH 
beautiful.  What  is  this  unity,  this  common  thing, 
which  we  find  in  so  many  applications  of  the  word 
"church?"  Some  deny — the  Roman  Catholics  nota- 
bly— that  there  is  any  such  higher  unity.  The  Roman 
Catholics  have  their  own  "notes"  or  marks  of  the 
church,  and  they  define  the  thing  and  restrict  the  ap- 
plication of  the  word  accordingly.  Hence  a  member  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  for  example,  is  not,  in  their 
estimation,  a  member  of  the  church.  So  with  some 
other  "Christian  denominations,"  as  for  instance,  the 
Episcopal.  It  is  a  part  of  the  doctrine  of  these  con- 
cerning the  church  to  deny  the  existence  of  any  such 
unity,  or  thing  in  common,  as  entitles  other  Christiai) 
bodies  to  be  called  the  Church.  Some  make  baptism 
by  immersion  an  indispensable  "note"  or  mark  of  the 
church.  But  the  Lutheran  "Church,"  and  the  various 
Presbyterian  "Churches"  and  the  various  Methodist 
"Societies,"  or  "Connections,"  or  "Churches,"  are  not 
so  restrictive  in  their  application  of  the  word.  I  sup- 
pose that  they  would  all  admit  that  a  bond  of  unity  is 
the  spiritual  fellowship  with  the  Lord  Jesus  the  great 
Head  of  all.  Hence  these  might  apply  the  term 
church  to  the  people  of  God  in  the  Old  Testament  times. 
Tn  the  pntnarchnl  n<jo  thov  miirht  ho  rnllefl  the  Patriar- 
chal church;  in  the  age  later  the  Theocratic  church  or 
kingdom  and  in  the  Christian  age  the  Christian  church. 
In  this  case  while  the  form  changes,  the  essence  re- 
mains the  same,  and  men  in  all  ages  are  saved  in  essen- 


OVR  DOCTRINES.  45 


tially  the  same  way.  Hence  the  bond,  or  thing  in  com- 
mon, uniting  these  various  forms  might  be  called  the 
purpose  and  plan  of  God  to  save  mankind,  these  varying 
forms  being  the  outward  expression  or  embodiment  of 
this  purpose  and  plan.  It  is  for  this  reason  that  every 
church  organization,  every  church  building,  institution, 
ordinance,  may  itself,  if  rightly  interpreted,  be  called  a 
mute  yet  voiceful  proclamation  of  glad  tidings.  Each 
means  so  much  more  than  it  seems  to  say.  We  can  see 
from  this  point  of  view,  to  say  nothing  of  any  other, 
how  improper  it  would  be  to  call  the  organized  form 
of  any  heathen  "religion"  a  church.  The  heathen  re- 
ligions in  their  outward  forms  are  not  authorized  or  any 
other  kind  of  embodiment  or  expression  of  the  divine 
purpose  and  plan  of  redemption. 

But  I  do  not  suppose  that  any  even  of  the  liberal 
"denominations"  would  be  willing  to  call  the  "Young 
Men^s  Christian  Association"  a  church  or  the  church,  in 
the  more  restricted  and  technical  sense  of  the  word.  It 
does  not  call  itself  a  church  in  this  sense,  nor  even  a 
branch  of  it.  What  "notes"  does  it  lack?  In  its  ca- 
pacity as  such  it  does  not  administer  the  ordinances  of 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper;  it  does  not  ordain  men 
to  the  ministry  of  the  gospel;  it  is  not  under  the 
auspices  or  guidance  of  any  bishop,  or  ecclesiastical 
judicature,  or  court,  nor  is  it  one  in  itself.  In  this  as- 
pect of  independency  and  irresponsibility,  it  differs 
from  the  Sunday  schools,  the  Leagues,  and  the  Societies 
of  Christian  Endeavor.  But  it  is  an  organization  of 
Christian  young  men  which  has  done  much  good  which 


46  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

it  was  supposed  the  cliurcli  could  not  or  would  not  do. 
It  is  in  theory  of  course  a  sad  reflection  upon  the 
church,  for  it  is  always  a  pity  that  it  should  under  any 
circumstances  be  necessary  to  say  that  the  church  is 
either  incompetent  or  unwilling  to  do  "the  whole  work 
of  an  evangelist/^  and  to  do  it  well. 

The  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church,  as  its  name 
implies,  is  Presbyterian  in  its  form  of  organization.  All 
churches  are  in  a  general  sense  episcopal.  In  ours  and 
the  other  Presbyterian  Churches,  the  Episcopal  func- 
tion is  lodged  in  the  Presbytery,  which  is  composed  of 
a  number  of  under  bishops  and  lay  elders.  As  com- 
pared one  with  another  these  "under  bishops"  are  of 
equal  authority  and  dignity,  but  they  are  subordinate 
to  the  presbytery.  The  presbytery  has  a  long  hst  of  du- 
ties marked  out  for  it,  and  a  larger  authority  than  it 
usually  exercises  but  not  larger  than  it  ought  to  exercise 
— provided  it  were  in  every  instance  as  wise  as  a  serpent 
and  as  devoid  of  evil  as  a  dove,  like  it  ought  to  be. 

But  the  function  of  no  church  terminates  upon  its 
own  machinery.  Beyond  looking  after  its  own  material 
well  being  what  is  the  function  or  duty  of  the  church? 
The  answer  is:  (l)To  receive  the  truth,  (2)  to  conserve 
or  take  care  of  the  truth,  (3)  to  promulgate  the  truth. 
The  source  whence  it  receives  the  truth  is  its  great 
Head.  From  him  to  it  are  committed  the  oracles  of 
God  which  we  call  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Before  there 
was  a  Bible  the  church  received  the  truth  in  special  un- 
written revelations;  but  it  does  not  so  receive  it  now. 
It  receives  it  now  as  handed  down  through  the  genera- 


OUR  DOCTRINES,  47 

tions  in  written  form.  In  conserving  it,  it  sees  to  it 
that  the  written  oracles  are  not  adulterated  by  mis- 
leading interpolations  or  additions,  and  that  constituent 
parts  thereof  are  not  excinded,  and  that  none  are  grossly 
misinterpreted.  Here  lies  the  advantage  on  the  part  of 
the  different  ^^Christian  denominations"  in  having  a 
great  many  commentators  and  expounders  of  the  oracles. 
It  is  like  having  a  complicated  system  of  accounts  gone 
over  by  a  great  many  different  accountants.  If  one 
makes  an  error,  whether  intentionally  or  inadvertently, 
another  may  detect  it.  The  church  promulgates  the 
truth  either  by  disseminating  the  Scriptures  in  the  very 
letter  thereof,  or  else  in  expositions  and  enforcements 
of  the  word  in  the  form  of  sermons,  lectures,  homiHes, 
and  religious  literature  of  various  kinds.  These  are  the 
ways  in  which  the  church  bears  witness  for  Christ  and 
persuades  men  to  be  "reconciled  to  God." 

But  this  leads  me  to  say  that  the  church  in  looking 
after  itself  needs  to  do  much  more  than  to  look  after 
the  well  being  of  its  machinery  or  organism.  There 
may  be  an  excellent  machinery  considered  merely  as 
machinery;  but  it  may  not  put  forth  its  utmost  effort, 
and  what  it  does  may  be  done  badly.  Unless  it  does 
more  than  look  after  its  machinery,  it  cannot  receive  the 
truth  intelligently;  it  cannot  conserve  the  truth  with- 
out doing  it  accidently;  it  cannot  promulgate  the  truth 
with  any  reasonable  assurance  that  it  is  not  at  the  same 
time  publishing  much  error.  It  may  have  much  intel- 
ligence and  little  piety,  or  much  piety  and  little  intel- 
ligence.    It  mav  have  much  ballast  and  no  steam,  or 


48  OUR  DOCTRINES. 

much  steam  and  no  ballast.  In  view  of  such  serious 
considerations  the  church — any  church,  I  mean — ought 
readily  to  see  its  duty.  As  a  whole,  as  well  as  in  its  in- 
dividual members  and  ministers,  it  ought  to  be  a  skilled 
workman,  one  that  will  give  itself  no  occasion  to  blush. 
The  church  is  a  divine  institution,  nut,  except  him  of 
whom  it  is  the  body,  it  is  made  out  of  human  material. 
Tliis  material,  as  a  whole  and  in  every  part,  ought  to 
see  to  it  that  it  is  qualified  for  the  work  whereunto  it 
is  called. 

But  why  should  the  church  have  a  creed?  For  the 
same  reason,  in  part  at  least,  that  a  State  should  have 
a  constitution.  In  union  there  is  strength,  but  there 
can  be  no  union  where  there  is  no  bond  of  union. 
The  Bible  is  obliged  to  be  expounded,  and  there  ought 
to  be  considerable  unanimity  of  interpretation  espe- 
cially of  what  are  regarded  as  the  great  fundamental 
truths.  They  that  fear  the  Lord  speak  often  one  to  an- 
other; but  they  cannot  speak  with  much  edification  if 
they  speak  in  divers  tongues.  So  it  is  well  that  they 
should  agree  upon  what  they  can  agree  upon,  and 
group  themselves  off  accordingly,  each  group  under  its 
own  vine  and  fig  tree — which  we  call  a  creed.  It  is 
simply  "I  believe." 

With  one  brief  word  on  the  subject  of  eschatol- 
ogy,  or  the  "Last  Things,"  I  close  this  series.  The 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  believes  that  the 
eternal  destiny  of  every  man  is  determined  this  side  of 
the  grave.  As  it  reads  the  Bible,  and  m  the  face  of  the 
awful  issues,  it  dares  not  teach  any  thing  else. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminat7-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01144  8695 


